An experimental nuclear physicist has
written an Open Letter to world renowned physicist, Dr Michio Kaku,
challenging his dismissal of non-conventional energy devices - more
popularly known as “free energy” machines.

Dr Robert Koontz, a nuclear physicist who has worked in
various government projects and held Top Secret classification,
pointed out the fallacies in Dr Kaku’s thinking. Dr Kaku, according
to Dr Koontz, needs to reconsider the feasibility of
non-conventional energy devices. Otherwise he may suffer the same
fate as early scientific critics of the Wright Brothers - critics
dismissed the idea of heavier-than-air flying machines as
impossible.

Recently, on the popular late-night
radio program, "Coast to Coast AM," which reportedly has a
listening audience of millions, you indicated that investors
call you up daily and ask whether certain inventions will work.
Characterizing those devices as "perpetual motion machines" you
said they were impossible to make.

Dr Kaku’s dismissal is based on energy
conservation laws that are based on the scientific belief that
energy can only ever be converted from one state to another.

This
leads to the view that the amount of energy in the universe remains
constant, and no energy is ever lost or created. The idea that a
machine can be created which generates more energy than it consumes
to run forever has been deemed to be scientifically impossible. The
idea of perpetual motion machines has long been discredited and has
been used as a kind of scientific slight against those proposing
non-conventional energy devices.

It is this rigid scientific
viewpoint that Dr Koontz directly challenges and goes on to say:

Dr. Kaku: You appear to believe that
the universe has 11 dimensions, many of which are supposed to be
hidden. Why would that be true while creation of energy using
negative mass electrons or using gauge transformations would be
impossible? Could you be wrong, sir? Undoubtedly you think you
are not wrong, but could you be wrong, sir?

You might say to me
that negative mass electrons have never been seen. But those
many dimensions you believe in have never been seen either. And
is it not true that we physicists for decades have used negative
mass electrons in our theories in order to reach agreement with
experiment?

Dr Koontz’s reference to negative mass
electrons is one way in which he believes energy conservation laws
can be maintained in an unconventional energy device.

When Paul Dirac, the Nobel
prize-winning physicist was developing the first form of
relativistic quantum mechanics he found it necessary to
introduce the concept of negative mass electrons. This
subsequently led Dirac to develop the idea that a hole in a sea
of negative mass electrons corresponded to a positron, otherwise
known as an antielectron. Some years later the positron was
observed and Dirac won the Nobel prize.

Another way for an unconventional or
“free energy” device to work is for it to use rotating
electromagnetic fields using magnets, plasma, or other electrical
conductors.

This creates what is called a “torsion field” where
energy is generated from the rotating objects. According to Dr Elizabeth Rauscher and
Nassim Haramein from the Resonance Project,
torsion fields power all known rotating objects in the universe from
suns and galaxies, to atoms.

Other physicists point to a zero point energy field where a quantum
flux creates virtually unlimited energy. Essentially, free or
"zero
point" energy comes out of the vacuum of space in a manner similar
to a bottle of soda that is shaken and opened. This was first
theorized by the Dutch physicist Dr Hendrik Casimir in 1948 and
later experimentally confirmed.

If an unconventional energy device uses negative mass electrons, as
Dr Koontz claims, then the energy conservation laws of physics may
well be maintained. If “free energy” devices use rotating magnetic
fields or zero point energy, there appears to be no way energy
conservation laws can be maintained unless one considers energy
moving between dimensions.

Interestingly, Dr Kaku believes that 11
dimensions exist - some of which are obviously beyond human
perception. If so, there are a number of ways in which the energy
conservation laws of physics can be maintained across the
“omniverse’ of 11 dimensions while considering the feasibility of
unconventional energy devices.

Perhaps we’ll find some answers if
and when Dr Kaku responds to Dr Koontz’s challenge.

This open letter relates to your disparagement of
energy-producing devices which at this juncture in time are
demonstrably critical to our nation's survival. And I write this
letter as a Ph.D. experimental nuclear physicist with
qualifications that I believe allow me to speak to the subject
in question, namely production of energy using non-conventional
means.

I ask that you read this letter carefully and ask that you not
dismiss it out of hand in the manner of many of our country's
physicists.

Recently, on the popular late-night radio program, "Coast to
Coast AM," which reportedly has a listening audience of
millions, you indicated that investors call you up daily and ask
whether certain inventions will work. Characterizing those
devices as "perpetual motion machines" you said they were
impossible to make. But that can be proven to be a false
statement.

Such devices can exist if negative
mass electrons can be introduced into electronic circuits and
possibly certain machines. They can also exist if other forms of
negative energy can be created, and apparently they can.
Finally, it appears to be the case that gauge transformations
could allow such devices to work. This would not involve a
violation of one of the most important laws of physics, namely
energy conservation, either, Dr. Kaku.

I believe you assume that such
devices do violate the laws of physics, which is also an
assumption that appears to be made by others.

Dr. Kaku: You appear to believe that the universe has 11
dimensions, many of which are supposed to be hidden. Why would
that be true while creation of energy using negative mass
electrons or using gauge transformations would be impossible?
Could you be wrong, sir? Undoubtedly you think you are not
wrong, but could you be wrong, sir?

You might say to me that negative mass electrons have never been
seen. But those many dimensions you believe in have never been
seen either. And is it not true that we physicists for decades
have used negative mass electrons in our theories in order to
reach agreement with experiment? And wasn't the positron
discovered because Dirac invoked the existence of negative mass
electrons - approximately 80 years ago?

Perhaps it is true that we physicists have not yet observed
negative mass electrons, but does that mean they do not exist?

Now let me ask you this: Have you ever examined even one of the
devices that you tell investors cannot work? I suspect you
haven't. There are in fact inventions that produce energy
without having any kind of conventional fuel. You may see one
work in a web page of mine linked to below. But perhaps you
think you don't even need to look. Could that be the case, Dr.
Kaku? Perhaps you simply "know" these devices can't work. Might
you not also have said many years ago that airplanes could never
fly?

Before the Wright brothers were
flying airplanes, renowned scientists said it was
impossible.

So, I ask that you examine the video
linked to below and I ask that you examine other such videos.

I can assure you the TPU device
works, sir. For the sake of our nation and the world, I ask that
you take the small amount of time needed to examine these
videos.

Please don't say that the above demonstrations were faked,
Dr. Kaku. There are many engineers who examined the device. And
some demonstrations were made outdoors, far from any possible
sources of energy.

The TPU units shown in the videos apparently use gauge
transformations. Those would be the same kind of gauge
transformations that, for decades, you theorists have been
telling us allow for electromagnetic energy non-conservation,
but then say don't have any practical applications. And we know
that theoretical physicists are never wrong, don't we? So the
device cannot work, can it? So why then does it work?

Could it be that gauge transformations do have practical
applications? Could it thus be that theoretical physicists could
be wrong about the impracticality of using gauge transformations
to make energy? I think so.

Do not gauge transformations lead to electromagnetic energy
non-conservation? And is it not true that in your analysis of
free energy devices you assume that electromagnetic energy is
conserved? That is a grave inconsistency, sir. And arguing that
gauge transformations lead to no change in the electric and
magnetic fields is not at all convincing as the question relates
to energy, not electric and magnetic fields.

Would you say that gauge waves cannot exist? And if you do allow
that they can exist, would they not carry energy, possibly in
both positive and negative forms?

Where then am I wrong, Dr. Kaku? Or could I be right - along
with many other Ph.D. physicists and engineers who are regularly
dismissed as crackpots?

You have said that you greatly respect the work of Nikola Tesla, and surely
you have studied his inventions and his life. If so, then you
might be aware that Nikola Tesla was planning to transmit power
all over the world in a way that you would surely say is
impossible. But you must know that Nikola Tesla was a very
careful experimenter who tested every idea before employing it.
What then is the answer to the implied dilemma?

So, Nikola Tesla was just a wild man, right? A nut. While Michio
Kaku and his 11 dimensions make wonderful sense. Or could
you and others be wrong about what Nikola Tesla was doing? Could
it even be the case that Tesla was using electromagnetic theory
that included the very gauge transformations that physicists of
this era do not include? Is that not possible, sir, and if not,
why not?

Therefore, if I may speak freely, I would say that while
millions or even billions of people live in desperate poverty,
and while millions of Americans lose their jobs because we don't
have this kind of technology - you tell people that such
technology is impossible, when it isn't.

Is everyone who disagrees with you and other leading theorists a
crackpot, Dr. Kaku? Was Nikola Tesla a crackpot? I would
strongly suggest that he wasn't at all a crackpot but was one of
the greatest inventors in the history of the world - and I
believe you have also said as much.

So why then would you dismiss
Tesla's ideas about free energy?

I must say that I have seen many smirks in association with
production of free energy - Smirks - while millions of Americans
lose their jobs and the United States falls into a terrible
economic decline. Smirks. Is that appropriate, sir? I would say
not.

But the matter does not end with the above TPU units. There is
also the work of Thomas Henry Moray who was
able to produce an estimated 50 kilowatts of power from a
tabletop unit that my analysis indicates involved employment of
negative mass electrons which Dr. Moray apparently captured in
very special circuits he built - many, many decades ago.

Here is a link to what I
have written about Dr. Moray's work. There are many more links
on the Internet: Please do take the time to investigate.